RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
Incidentally, this is also true for most commerical databases. The space of delete rows is not returned to OS automatically. while shutting down the database is not necessary but trying to return space back to OS does have a significant performance penalty and is not recommeneded on productions systems (at least in oracle and SQL Server). Tarun -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 2:10 AM To: The Linux-Delhi mailing list; The Linux-Delhi mailing list Subject: RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle Correct! To be more precise: The standard form of VACUUM is best used with the goal of maintaining a fairly level steady-state usage of disk space. The standard form finds old tuples and makes their space available for re-use within the table, but it does not try very hard to shorten the table file and return disk space to the operating system. If you need to return disk space to the operating system you can use VACUUM FULL --- but what's the point of releasing disk space that will only have to be allocated again soon? Moderately frequent standard VACUUMs are a better approach than infrequent VACUUM FULLs for maintaining heavily-updated tables. Recommended practice for most sites is to schedule a database-wide VACUUM once a day at a lowusage time of day, supplemented by more frequent vacuuming of heavily-updated tables if necessary. (If you have multiple databases in an installation, don't forget to vacuum each one; the vacuumdb script may be helpful.) Use plain VACUUM, not VACUUM FULL, for routine vacuuming for space recovery. VACUUM FULL is recommended for cases where you know you have deleted the majority of tuples in a table, so that the steady-state size of the table can be shrunk substantially with VACUUM FULL's more aggressive approach. If you have a table whose contents are deleted completely every so often, consider doing it with TRUNCATE rather than using DELETE followed by VACUUM. Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva -Original Message- From: Raj Mathur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu 10/16/2003 5:38 PM To: The Linux-Delhi mailing list Cc: Subject: Re: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ambar == Ambar Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Surely NO...so we would certainly be interested to know some of your Ambar Biggest Internet Sites running on open source. Geocrawler use Postgres. Ambar Intresting thing about Geocrawler AudioGalaxy using Ambar postgres was that both of these sites seemed to go offline Ambar for daily maintainence during the middle of the day here in Ambar India. Both the sites ran Postgresql, and were probably Ambar running a daily database cleanup. IMHO this is what has Ambar kept me away from considering postgresql for serious Ambar databases. Has this issue of regular database maintainence Ambar been solved by the recent versions of postgresql? PostgreSQL (PgSQL) has two types of ``cleanup'': vacuum and vacuum full. The first (plain vacuum) merely marked unused (deleted) disk clusters as free but does not compact the physical database. The second (vacuum full) does all that and also physically compacts the database on disk. Using vacuum full will lock up your database, no queries or transactions will be possible while it is running. However most databases achieve a sort of `steady state' (roughly the same number of records being added and deleted regularly) and plain vacuum suffices for that. Transactions are possible during vacuum, and most installations will prefer to use that periodically over vacuum full. It's only if your database sizes vary wildly over the course of time that you'll need to use vacuum full (and consequently bring the system down for maintenance). The above is from my understanding of PgSQL, would appreciate clarifications in case I've missed anything out. Ambar Another intresting thing about postgresql is that while the Ambar web hosting control panels on Linux used to only support Ambar MySQL, cPanel Plesk now have support for Postgresql. To Ambar me this is a good sign. Now even smaller sites can start Ambar using Postgresql. Regards, - -- Raju - -- Raj Mathur[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kandalaya.org/ GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F It is the mind that moves -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux
RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
Did some research over the weekend. First of all some good news: Heavy duty sites that run Postgres include; A) RubyForge (rubyforge.org). They have 300K records. Not too many but moderately high. B) .org domain. c) sourceforge used to run postgres. AFAIK, they moved out because IBM made that a condition for funding them and not because of any issues with postgres. Now, the bad news: Postgres is still not clusterable. What postgres calls clustering is using triggers to copy data from one server to another. This is not what is usually meant by database clusters. There would be no good way to handle globally unique columns or handle conflicting writes and transactions in general. (If you call using triggers and copy clustering. I have a geographically distributed mysql cluster that uses rsync and cron !!) When I say database cluster, I mean that you put a bullet thru one of the servers while your query is running and your query still returns the right results as if nothing happened. This can be achieved by something like mounting RAID-5 (or raid-10) (software or hardware) on two postgres boxes to somehow mirror data over two servers and the two servers somehow aware which of them is writing which block so that they do not knock each other's writes. Seems like that is pretty far away. To be precise, it is not really RAID but actually raid-like-transparent-mirroring-over-network and does not exist in mainstream linux kernel. However, it seems oracle is giving similar technology (called OpenGFS)(http://otn.oracle.com/tech/linux/open_source.html) as well as tools to run this kind of network over firewire or fibre. (100 Mbps might end up being too slow for such an exercise). IMHO, oracle is giving this technology away so that they can sell more RAC licenses on linux. However, oracle or not, I would prefer seeing something similar to OpenGFS integrated into main stream kernel (I believe the closest today in mainstream kernel would be mounting network block devices in somekind of software RAID volumes). Other than clustering, things that are currently not in postges but exists in oracle: A) materialized views (views that are calculated early on and not just-in-time) B) index-organized tables (where the entire table is in index. Great for performance on narrow tables) C) database links (this is linking columns to point at values in other databases) D) point-in-time recovery (restore database state to as on XXX) E) nested transactions F) savepoint G) good cursor support (Right now executing a query fetches the entire result set in memory. This is not scalable). This is easy to do for simple cases but probably very difficult for queries inside transactions H) execute batch /bulk updates etc. (there is copy but that is not standard) i) peripheral tools. Lot of people use oracle forms and reports. I have not heard of anything similar for postgres. It would be also nice to have some good migration tools. J) tablespaces K) multi-column function-based indexes Many things just came in 7.3 and are not completely tested. They inculded: A) stored procedures that can return result sets (table functions) B) schema support C) prepared queries D) dependancy tracking E) good secuirty and priviledge model (before 7.3 it was rather elementary) F) improved internationalization support (this still has to go some way) tarun ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
The standard form of VACUUM is best used with the goal of maintaining a fairly level steady-state usage of disk space. The standard form finds old tuples and makes their space available for re-use within the table, but it does not try very hard to shorten the table file and return disk space to the operating system. If you need to return disk space to the operating system you can use VACUUM FULL --- but whats the point of releasing disk space that will only have to be allocated again soon? Moderately frequent standard VACUUMs are a better approach than infrequent VACUUM FULLs for maintaining heavily-updated tables. Recommended practice for most sites is to schedule a database-wide VACUUM once a day at a lowusage time of day, supplemented by more frequent vacuuming of heavily-updated tables if necessary. (If you have multiple databases in an installation, dont forget to vacuum each one; the vacuumdb script may be helpful.) Use plain VACUUM, not VACUUM FULL, for routine vacuuming for space recovery. So does VACUUM require the database to be taken offline? Or was this an issue with older versions of pgSQL? As I don't see the Geocrawler under maintainence pages nowadays. There was a time when I only saw the under maintainence page at Geocrawler!! Ambar Roy ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ambar == Ambar Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ambar [snip]. Ambar So does VACUUM require the database to be taken offline? Or Ambar was this an issue with older versions of pgSQL? As I don't Ambar see the Geocrawler under maintainence pages nowadays. There Ambar was a time when I only saw the under maintainence page at Ambar Geocrawler!! Haven't used the newer versions of PostgreSQL, but with 7.2.3 (with which I'm familiar) VACUUM doesn't require any special handling, while VACUUM FULL locks up the database until the command completes. VACUUM FULL also doesn't run while the database is in use, e.g. when transactions are pending. Regards, - -- Raju - -- Raj Mathur[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kandalaya.org/ GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F It is the mind that moves -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 and Gnu Privacy Guard http://www.gnupg.org/ iD8DBQE/kYhuyWjQ78xo0X8RArHKAKCMHfW3tm8oo+Z4y3Cy2vV1R5TQtwCeO/Rh 0MCKClGa72LhpXlaXmcbBVI= =A7mB -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
Some more information, some numbers from mysql: http://www.mysql.com/information/features.html http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmarks-old.html regards shantanu On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 17:38:34 +0530, Raj Mathur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ambar == Ambar Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Surely NO...so we would certainly be interested to know some of your Ambar Biggest Internet Sites running on open source. Geocrawler use Postgres. Ambar Intresting thing about Geocrawler AudioGalaxy using Ambar postgres was that both of these sites seemed to go offline Ambar for daily maintainence during the middle of the day here in Ambar India. Both the sites ran Postgresql, and were probably Ambar running a daily database cleanup. IMHO this is what has Ambar kept me away from considering postgresql for serious Ambar databases. Has this issue of regular database maintainence Ambar been solved by the recent versions of postgresql? PostgreSQL (PgSQL) has two types of ``cleanup'': vacuum and vacuum full. The first (plain vacuum) merely marked unused (deleted) disk clusters as free but does not compact the physical database. The second (vacuum full) does all that and also physically compacts the database on disk. Using vacuum full will lock up your database, no queries or transactions will be possible while it is running. However most databases achieve a sort of `steady state' (roughly the same number of records being added and deleted regularly) and plain vacuum suffices for that. Transactions are possible during vacuum, and most installations will prefer to use that periodically over vacuum full. It's only if your database sizes vary wildly over the course of time that you'll need to use vacuum full (and consequently bring the system down for maintenance). The above is from my understanding of PgSQL, would appreciate clarifications in case I've missed anything out. Ambar Another intresting thing about postgresql is that while the Ambar web hosting control panels on Linux used to only support Ambar MySQL, cPanel Plesk now have support for Postgresql. To Ambar me this is a good sign. Now even smaller sites can start Ambar using Postgresql. Regards, - -- Raju - -- Raj Mathur[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kandalaya.org/ GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F It is the mind that moves -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 and Gnu Privacy Guard http://www.gnupg.org/ iD8DBQE/joo+yWjQ78xo0X8RAh/9AJ92FPCIhsOSYWwlOrgI610XI6IjtQCbBOCv apkVPv4S87Ot14c7+YDzGwo= =RF8Y -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
Please check http://formation.espacecourbe.com/choosing/dbc_crashMe20001011.html and some comparision reports http://formation.espacecourbe.com/choosing/ Regards shantanu On 16 Oct 2003 12:15:25 +0530, Tarun Dua [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 11:35, Ambar Roy wrote: Geocrawler use Postgres. Intresting thing about Geocrawler AudioGalaxy using postgres was that both of these sites seemed to go offline for daily maintainence during the middle of the day here in India. Both the sites ran Postgresql, and were probably running a daily database cleanup. IMHO this is what has kept me away from considering postgresql for serious databases. Has this issue of regular database maintainence been solved by the recent versions of postgresql? I haven't heard about any horror stories on PostgreSQL lately although I prefer MySQL till now. I am planning a migration from MySQL to Postgres. -Tarun ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
Correct! To be more precise: The standard form of VACUUM is best used with the goal of maintaining a fairly level steady-state usage of disk space. The standard form finds old tuples and makes their space available for re-use within the table, but it does not try very hard to shorten the table file and return disk space to the operating system. If you need to return disk space to the operating system you can use VACUUM FULL --- but whats the point of releasing disk space that will only have to be allocated again soon? Moderately frequent standard VACUUMs are a better approach than infrequent VACUUM FULLs for maintaining heavily-updated tables. Recommended practice for most sites is to schedule a database-wide VACUUM once a day at a lowusage time of day, supplemented by more frequent vacuuming of heavily-updated tables if necessary. (If you have multiple databases in an installation, dont forget to vacuum each one; the vacuumdb script may be helpful.) Use plain VACUUM, not VACUUM FULL, for routine vacuuming for space recovery. VACUUM FULL is recommended for cases where you know you have deleted the majority of tuples in a table, so that the steady-state size of the table can be shrunk substantially with VACUUM FULLs more aggressive approach. If you have a table whose contents are deleted completely every so often, consider doing it with TRUNCATE rather than using DELETE followed by VACUUM. Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva -Original Message- From: Raj Mathur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu 10/16/2003 5:38 PM To: The Linux-Delhi mailing list Cc: Subject: Re: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ambar == Ambar Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Surely NO...so we would certainly be interested to know some of your Ambar Biggest Internet Sites running on open source. Geocrawler use Postgres. Ambar Intresting thing about Geocrawler AudioGalaxy using Ambar postgres was that both of these sites seemed to go offline Ambar for daily maintainence during the middle of the day here in Ambar India. Both the sites ran Postgresql, and were probably Ambar running a daily database cleanup. IMHO this is what has Ambar kept me away from considering postgresql for serious Ambar databases. Has this issue of regular database maintainence Ambar been solved by the recent versions of postgresql? PostgreSQL (PgSQL) has two types of ``cleanup'': vacuum and vacuum full. The first (plain vacuum) merely marked unused (deleted) disk clusters as free but does not compact the physical database. The second (vacuum full) does all that and also physically compacts the database on disk. Using vacuum full will lock up your database, no queries or transactions will be possible while it is running. However most databases achieve a sort of `steady state' (roughly the same number of records being added and deleted regularly) and plain vacuum suffices for that. Transactions are possible during vacuum, and most installations will prefer to use that periodically over vacuum full. It's only if your database sizes vary wildly over the course of time that you'll need to use vacuum full (and consequently bring the system down for maintenance). The above is from my understanding of PgSQL, would appreciate clarifications in case I've missed anything out. Ambar Another intresting thing about postgresql is that while the Ambar web hosting control panels on Linux used to only support Ambar MySQL, cPanel Plesk now have support for Postgresql. To Ambar me this is a good sign. Now even smaller sites can start Ambar using Postgresql. Regards, - -- Raju - -- Raj Mathur[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kandalaya.org/ GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F It is the mind that moves -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 and Gnu Privacy Guard http://www.gnupg.org/ iD8DBQE/joo+yWjQ78xo0X8RAh/9AJ92FPCIhsOSYWwlOrgI610XI6IjtQCbBOCv apkVPv4S87Ot14c7+YDzGwo= =RF8Y -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ambar == Ambar Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Surely NO...so we would certainly be interested to know some of your Ambar Biggest Internet Sites running on open source. Geocrawler use Postgres. Ambar Intresting thing about Geocrawler AudioGalaxy using Ambar postgres was that both of these sites seemed to go offline Ambar for daily maintainence during the middle of the day here in Ambar India. Both the sites ran Postgresql, and were probably Ambar running a daily database cleanup. IMHO this is what has Ambar kept me away from considering postgresql for serious Ambar databases. Has this issue of regular database maintainence Ambar been solved by the recent versions of postgresql? PostgreSQL (PgSQL) has two types of ``cleanup'': vacuum and vacuum full. The first (plain vacuum) merely marked unused (deleted) disk clusters as free but does not compact the physical database. The second (vacuum full) does all that and also physically compacts the database on disk. Using vacuum full will lock up your database, no queries or transactions will be possible while it is running. However most databases achieve a sort of `steady state' (roughly the same number of records being added and deleted regularly) and plain vacuum suffices for that. Transactions are possible during vacuum, and most installations will prefer to use that periodically over vacuum full. It's only if your database sizes vary wildly over the course of time that you'll need to use vacuum full (and consequently bring the system down for maintenance). The above is from my understanding of PgSQL, would appreciate clarifications in case I've missed anything out. Ambar Another intresting thing about postgresql is that while the Ambar web hosting control panels on Linux used to only support Ambar MySQL, cPanel Plesk now have support for Postgresql. To Ambar me this is a good sign. Now even smaller sites can start Ambar using Postgresql. Regards, - -- Raju - -- Raj Mathur[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kandalaya.org/ GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F It is the mind that moves -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 and Gnu Privacy Guard http://www.gnupg.org/ iD8DBQE/joo+yWjQ78xo0X8RAh/9AJ92FPCIhsOSYWwlOrgI610XI6IjtQCbBOCv apkVPv4S87Ot14c7+YDzGwo= =RF8Y -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 19:58, Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva wrote: Hi Tarun, Let me make it very cleat that I don't have any hunch in open source and thats why I am in the list but my dear, facts are facts. (Is Amazon.com running on open source (database)? Is eBay.com running on open source (database)? Is Yahoo.com running on open source (database)? Citing now, http://www.serverworldmagazine.com/sunserver/2001/02/bigboys.shtml http://www.mysql.com/press/user_stories/yahoo_finance.html http://www.ziatg.com/Content/success_stories.htm Surely NO...so we would certainly be interested to know some of your Biggest Internet Sites running on open source. Geocrawler use Postgres. http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=755group_id=1 Quote PostgreSQL has proven itself a stable and strong-performing database solution. PostgreSQL is the database back used to power the SourceForge.net site today. /Quote sf.net uses mysql And some of the biggest sites are the Open Source community's sites running on Open Source databases. Kindly show us any relevant benchmark to prove your point on your tried and tested approach. See http://formation.espacecourbe.com/choosing/dbc_paper_opensource_database.html And also do let us know if we can live without Foreign Keys in a relational world (MySQL)? All that is history!! Check out the newer InnoDb support. -Tarun Dua ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
I do'nt know for sure but as far as my memory goes. sf.net started of with postgres and then moved on to use DB2 from IBM because of scaling issues with postgres. -- supreet [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
Hi Tarun, Let me make it very cleat that I don't have any hunch in open source and thats why I am in the list but my dear, facts are facts. (Is Amazon.com running on open source (database)? Is eBay.com running on open source (database)? Is Yahoo.com running on open source (database)? Surely NO...so we would certainly be interested to know some of your Biggest Internet Sites running on open source. Kindly show us any relevant benchmark to prove your point on your tried and tested approach. That (deploying parallel servers) reminds me of a circus. Parallel execution of query in PostgeSQL? Try out and f'd for yourself. And also do let us know if we can live without Foreign Keys in a relational world (MySQL)? Well I would prefer (anyday) a muft thandi lassi than a muft thanda software. Regards, Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva -Original Message- From: Tarun Dua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tue 10/14/2003 2:16 PM To: The Linux-Delhi mailing list Cc: Subject: RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle On Mon, 2003-10-13 at 22:13, Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva wrote: The strategy of employing dual servers to divide your data is a short term arrangement. Lot of performance related issues *will* crop up in the future and lot of fingers would be raised on you. No such things would happen if the architecture is good. If at all this would normally lead to performance improvement not degradation. The strategy to divide the Database onto multiple parallel servers is a good one And a tried and tested one at that. It would be anyday faster than a single large footprint database cluster. All you would need to do is pick up data in parallel from more than one database to generate a report and very likely use a single database for a transaction. And Gurpreet about your hunch on using a Free Software. Biggest of Internet Sites are running on open source databases. And you have option of paying up if you don't like Free(muft as in thandi lassi) software. -Tarun ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
Gurpreet SGkgVGFydW4sDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICBMZXQgbWUgbWFrZSBpdCB2ZXJ5IGNsZWF0IHRoYXQg Gurpreet SSBkb24ndCBoYXZlIGFueSBodW5jaCBpbiBvcGVuIHNvdXJjZSBhbmQgdGhhdHMgd2h5IEkgYW0g Gurpreet aW4gdGhlIGxpc3QgYnV0IG15IGRlYXIsIGZhY3RzIGFyZSBmYWN0cy4NCihJcyBBbWF6b24uY29t Gurpreet IHJ1bm5pbmcgb24gb3BlbiBzb3VyY2UgKGRhdGFiYXNlKT8gSXMgZUJheS5jb20gcnVubmluZyBv Gurpreet biBvcGVuIHNvdXJjZSAoZGF0YWJhc2UpPyBJcyBZYWhvby5jb20gcnVubmluZyBvbiBvcGVuIHNv Gurpreet dXJjZSAoZGF0YWJhc2UpPw0KU3VyZWx5IE5PLi4uc28gd2Ugd291bGQgY2VydGFpbmx5IGJlIGlu Gurpreet dGVyZXN0ZWQgdG8ga25vdyBzb21lIG9mIHlvdXIgPiAiQmlnZ2VzdCBJbnRlcm5ldCBTaXRlcyBy Gurpreet dW5uaW5nIG9uIG9wZW4gc291cmNlIi4NCktpbmRseSBzaG93IHVzIGFueSByZWxldmFudCBiZW5j Gurpreet aG1hcmsgdG8gcHJvdmUgeW91ciBwb2ludCBvbiB5b3VyICJ0cmllZCBhbmQgdGVzdGVkIGFwcHJv Gurpreet YWNoIi4gVGhhdCAoZGVwbG95aW5nIHBhcmFsbGVsIHNlcnZlcnMpIHJlbWluZHMgbWUgb2YgYSBj Gurpreet aXJjdXMuDQpQYXJhbGxlbCBleGVjdXRpb24gb2YgcXVlcnkgaW4gUG9zdGdlU1FMPyBUcnkgb3V0 Gurpreet IGFuZCBmJ2QgZm9yIHlvdXJzZWxmLiBBbmQgYWxzbyBkbyBsZXQgdXMga25vdyBpZiB3ZSBjYW4g Gurpreet bGl2ZSB3aXRob3V0IEZvcmVpZ24gS2V5cyBpbiBhIHJlbGF0aW9uYWwgd29ybGQgKE15U1FMKT8g Gurpreet DQpXZWxsIEkgd291bGQgcHJlZmVyIChhbnlkYXkpIGEgbXVmdCB0aGFuZGkgbGFzc2kgdGhhbiBh Gurpreet IG11ZnQgInRoYW5kYSIgc29mdHdhcmUuDQpSZWdhcmRzLA0KR3VycHJlZXQgU2luZ2ggU2FjaGRl Gurpreet dmENCg0KCS0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tIA0KCUZyb206IFRhcnVuIER1YSBbbWFp Gurpreet bHRvOnRhcnVuZHVhQGxpbnV4LWRlbGhpLm9yZ10gDQoJU2VudDogVHVlIDEwLzE0LzIwMDMgMjox Gurpreet NiBQTSANCglUbzogVGhlIExpbnV4LURlbGhpIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCANCglDYzogDQoJU3ViamVj Gurpreet dDogUkU6IFtpbHVnZF0gUG9zdGdyZXMgdnMgb3JhY2xlDQoJDQoJDQoNCglPbiBNb24sIDIwMDMt Gurpreet MTAtMTMgYXQgMjI6MTMsIEd1cnByZWV0IFNpbmdoIFNhY2hkZXZhIHdyb3RlOg0KCT4gVGhlIHN0 Gurpreet cmF0ZWd5IG9mIGVtcGxveWluZyBkdWFsIHNlcnZlcnMgdG8gZGl2aWRlIHlvdXIgZGF0YQ0KCT4g Gurpreet aXMgYSBzaG9ydCB0ZXJtIGFycmFuZ2VtZW50LiBMb3Qgb2YgcGVyZm9ybWFuY2UgcmVsYXRlZCBp Gurpreet c3N1ZXMgKndpbGwqIGNyb3AgdXAgaW4gdGhlIGZ1dHVyZSBhbmQgbG90IG9mIGZpbmdlcnMgd291 Gurpreet bGQgYmUgcmFpc2VkIG9uIHlvdS4NCglObyBzdWNoIHRoaW5ncyB3b3VsZCBoYXBwZW4gaWYgdGhl Gurpreet IGFyY2hpdGVjdHVyZSBpcyBnb29kLg0KCUlmIGF0IGFsbCB0aGlzIHdvdWxkIG5vcm1hbGx5IGxl Gurpreet YWQgdG8gcGVyZm9ybWFuY2UgaW1wcm92ZW1lbnQgbm90DQoJZGVncmFkYXRpb24uDQoJVGhlIHN0 Gurpreet cmF0ZWd5IHRvIGRpdmlkZSB0aGUgRGF0YWJhc2Ugb250byBtdWx0aXBsZSBwYXJhbGxlbCBzZXJ2 Gurpreet ZXJzIGlzIGEgZ29vZCBvbmUNCglBbmQgYSB0cmllZCBhbmQgdGVzdGVkIG9uZSBhdCB0aGF0Lg0K Gurpreet CUl0IHdvdWxkIGJlIGFueWRheSBmYXN0ZXIgdGhhbiBhIHNpbmdsZSBsYXJnZSBmb290cHJpbnQg Gurpreet ZGF0YWJhc2UNCgljbHVzdGVyLg0KCUFsbCB5b3Ugd291bGQgbmVlZCB0byBkbyBpcyBwaWNrIHVw Gurpreet IGRhdGEgaW4gcGFyYWxsZWwgZnJvbSBtb3JlIHRoYW4gb25lDQoJZGF0YWJhc2UgdG8gZ2VuZXJh Gurpreet dGUgYSByZXBvcnQgYW5kIHZlcnkgbGlrZWx5IHVzZSBhIHNpbmdsZSBkYXRhYmFzZSBmb3INCglh Gurpreet IHRyYW5zYWN0aW9uLg0KCUFuZCBHdXJwcmVldCBhYm91dCB5b3VyIGh1bmNoIG9uIHVzaW5nIGEg Gurpreet RnJlZSBTb2Z0d2FyZS4NCglCaWdnZXN0IG9mIEludGVybmV0IFNpdGVzIGFyZSBydW5uaW5nIG9u Gurpreet IG9wZW4gc291cmNlIGRhdGFiYXNlcy4NCglBbmQgeW91IGhhdmUgb3B0aW9uIG9mIHBheWluZyB1 Gurpreet cCBpZiB5b3UgZG9uJ3QgbGlrZSBGcmVlKG11ZnQgYXMgaW4NCgl0aGFuZGkgbGFzc2kpIHNvZnR3 Gurpreet YXJlLg0KCQ0KCS1UYXJ1bg0KCQ0KCQ0KCQ0KCQ0KCV9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f Gurpreet X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQoJaWx1Z2QgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQoJaWx1Z2RAbGlzdHMu Gurpreet bGludXgtZGVsaGkub3JnDQoJaHR0cDovL2Zyb2RvLmhzZXJ1cy5uZXQvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5m Gurpreet by9pbHVnZA0KCQ0KCQ0KDQo= Any particular reason you're writing in base64 as opposed to, say, quoted-printable or text/plain? -- Raju -- Raj Mathur[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kandalaya.org/ GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F It is the mind that moves ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
Dear Tarun, Comparison of PostgreSQL (open source) vis-a-vis Oracle (commercial) is UNFAIR! The subject *should* be PostgeSQL vs Foxpro Ooops MySQL. PostgreSQL no doubt is a good database BUT you can't match Oracle's superior technology. Its in the business for the past 27 years (PostgreSQL made its presence felt in 1996) and a dominant player (40% market share). Oracle's database is supported on PDAs to MPP machines (support for more than 200 platforms). PostgreSQL CAN't boast such kind of statistics. Replication Support was ONLY announced lately 28/08/2003. It will take *some* time to mature (bug fixing underway). Fail over support Yawn, Yawn ...N/D (No Details). Oracle's technology (i.e Real Application Clusters) *is* UNBREAKABLE. Consider this: Synonyms Postgres: No Updateable views Postgres: No. Partial rollback of transaction Postgres: No. Practically useful maximum number of concurrent users Postgres: N/D Practical maximum number of concurrent users writing to the database Postgres: N/D Incremental backups Postgres: No. Scalability - Support for SMP systems (parallel query execution, etc.) Postgres: Postgres is not threaded, but every connection gets it's own process. The OS will distribute the processes across the processors. Basically a single connection will not be any faster with SMP, but multiple connections will be. Bitmap indexes Postgres: No. OLAP supporting functions in SQL Postgres: No. Automatic partitioning of large tables/indexes Postgres: No. Gateways to other DBMSs Postgres: None. Access to multiple databases in one session Postgres: Only switching between databases. Two phase commit Postgres: No. VLDB implementations Postgres: 60GB+ databases exist BUT performance usually degrades. Support from CASE packages Postgres: N/D Special solutions for storage of XML documents Postgres: No. XML support integrated in DBMS Postgres: No. Dedicated Web servers Postgres: None. Automatic recovery from failures Postgres: No. There is no transaction log, so the only recovery method is to restore database from backup Availability and quality of technical support Postgres: ONLY mailing lists and web-site (postgresql.org). Poor. Specific market segments occupied Postgres: Mostly in education and small web services -Original Message- From: Tarun Upadhyay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri 10/10/2003 9:50 PM To: 'The Linux-Delhi mailing list' Cc: Subject: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle We have a customer application on oracle. They want to crate a small footprint version of it to be sold at a cheaper price. I want to suggest that Postgres could be the right choice of database for that as it is close to oracle in its sql syntax and hence porting should be simpler. Can anybody guide me on what kind of pitfalls we could run into by choosing Postgres. The database is not very large but is much larger than what goes for database in mysql discussions (about 1 GB of data, 100 tables with about 10-50 MB added every day)? In particular, I would be interested in hearing from people who have run moderately large databases on postgres and how fast they found it. I have heard that it is possible to now provide replication and fail over with postgres. Has anybody tried it? Tarun ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
[ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
We have a customer application on oracle. They want to crate a small footprint version of it to be sold at a cheaper price. I want to suggest that Postgres could be the right choice of database for that as it is close to oracle in its sql syntax and hence porting should be simpler. Can anybody guide me on what kind of pitfalls we could run into by choosing Postgres. The database is not very large but is much larger than what goes for database in mysql discussions (about 1 GB of data, 100 tables with about 10-50 MB added every day)? In particular, I would be interested in hearing from people who have run moderately large databases on postgres and how fast they found it. I have heard that it is possible to now provide replication and fail over with postgres. Has anybody tried it? Tarun ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
Hi Tarun, I think you are trying to compare a Apple with a Water Melon. But any case if you are really facing a real time scenario, please make it clear. what exactly the application you are running and how many concurrent user you are expecting to be there as concurrency is a major factor which can cause ample amount of problems for the DBA. I make sure that I would be able to solve all your queries. Regards, Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva -Original Message- From: Tarun Upadhyay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri 10/10/2003 9:50 PM To: 'The Linux-Delhi mailing list' Cc: Subject: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle We have a customer application on oracle. They want to crate a small footprint version of it to be sold at a cheaper price. I want to suggest that Postgres could be the right choice of database for that as it is close to oracle in its sql syntax and hence porting should be simpler. Can anybody guide me on what kind of pitfalls we could run into by choosing Postgres. The database is not very large but is much larger than what goes for database in mysql discussions (about 1 GB of data, 100 tables with about 10-50 MB added every day)? In particular, I would be interested in hearing from people who have run moderately large databases on postgres and how fast they found it. I have heard that it is possible to now provide replication and fail over with postgres. Has anybody tried it? Tarun ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle
Gupreet, It is a real application. It's an OLTP appliaction for banking and credit card industry. From a concurrency point of view, I expect about 200 connections to the database in the worst case and a fifth of that on the average. however, if postgres cannot handle that kind of user connections; that is fine too. I just need to know the number it can handle and then I will find a way of dividing the data over 2 or more servers such that each gets lesser load. A little off-topic, but A little research on the web mentions that Postgres Query optimizer is weak and in general one should optimize the queries by hand (we have to do the same for oracle anyway. For that kind of database size, I do not trust the query optimizer any way). Is that true? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2003 2:32 AM To: The Linux-Delhi mailing list; The Linux-Delhi mailing list Subject: RE: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle Hi Tarun, I think you are trying to compare a Apple with a Water Melon. But any case if you are really facing a real time scenario, please make it clear. what exactly the application you are running and how many concurrent user you are expecting to be there as concurrency is a major factor which can cause ample amount of problems for the DBA. I make sure that I would be able to solve all your queries. Regards, Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva -Original Message- From: Tarun Upadhyay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri 10/10/2003 9:50 PM To: 'The Linux-Delhi mailing list' Cc: Subject: [ilugd] Postgres vs oracle We have a customer application on oracle. They want to crate a small footprint version of it to be sold at a cheaper price. I want to suggest that Postgres could be the right choice of database for that as it is close to oracle in its sql syntax and hence porting should be simpler. Can anybody guide me on what kind of pitfalls we could run into by choosing Postgres. The database is not very large but is much larger than what goes for database in mysql discussions (about 1 GB of data, 100 tables with about 10-50 MB added every day)? In particular, I would be interested in hearing from people who have run moderately large databases on postgres and how fast they found it. I have heard that it is possible to now provide replication and fail over with postgres. Has anybody tried it? Tarun ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
